1 hour agoShareSaveGoogle DeepmindIn tests of the system with 23 historians the team found that an historian working with Aeneas came up with more accurate results than either Aeneas on its own or an historian on their own. “The feedback was that Aeneas was not only allowing the historians to accelerate their work but it also revealed parallels that they had previously not identified,” according to Dr Sommerschield.”And that is the future value of this work, not just to do what we do faster and better but also to do things we didn’t think to do before.”AI interpretation of even modern texts can be glitchy, so there is concern that mistakes could be made. But according to Dr Assael, Aeneas is a tool to guide historians, not a replacement for them.”We acknowledge that AI might not be able to get everything right all the time and I don’t think historians will work under that expectation,” he said.He said it would be down to human historians to weigh up Aeneas’ predictions and decide which made more sense.
